zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Ending the repeated Ben article creations
"Ben" is a popular page being created by IPs (I think it's always been IPs who did it) due to the famous haunted MM cartridge vids. We've had to delete this 4 times 6 times now. It's possible to protect a name for a page that does not exist. This means we could protect the name "Ben" from being created by IPs. We'd need to leave it creatable by others in case an actual Zelda character arises named Ben. RDH and I just tested this on another wikia wiki and all of it worked flawlessly. The only drawback is that it'd prevent IPs from creating a legitimate Ben article in the future, should an actual canonical Ben arise (any other user could still do it).--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 20:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC) : : And if an actual Ben shows up in a game, Nintendo shouldn't have done that. --'BassJapas' 20:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC) ::Personally, I think it is a great idea. The article has been removed four times now and who knows how many more times it will show up. If an actual character named Ben does legitimately show up in the future, then I don't see why any of our countless editors, who would presumably own the future title, so the article would be created in the future anyways. Creation of an unneeded article four times is enough. - McGillivray227 20:46, March 5, 2011 (UTC) We absolutely should do this. Jedimasterlink (talk) 20:51, March 5, 2011 (UTC) :We should do that Oni Link 21:34, March 5, 2011 (UTC) ::I agree. Also, will the page be semi-protected or protected? I think semi-protection won't help too much, because someone would just need to have a 4-day old account to make it. If it is protected, only admins can make the page. If there is an actual Ben character in a game, then an admin can create and unprotect the page.--'DekuStick' '' '' 21:40, March 5, 2011 (UTC) :::Since a registered user has participated in this Ben stuff (ZeldaMarkus), I think fully protecting the page is reasonable for now. If Nintendo ever makes an actual Ben character, since the present Ben would still exist, the page should remain at least semi-protected if that happens. Jedimasterlink (talk) 21:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Make that five times...what does everyone think about fully protecting the page? Are we in agreement regarding this? Jedimasterlink (talk) 23:25, March 5, 2011 (UTC) :If there is a way to make it so that the page cannot be created (unless if the "ban" is removed), then I'm in agreement. And, if an official Ben is released, then undo the "ban." Sounds good. The 23:28, March 5, 2011 (UTC) ::Yes, it's just like when you protect a page, only you're protecting a name so that it can't be made into a page. Also, I support the full block that prevents account holding users from creating it as well, since they too have been creating Ben pages.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 23:38, March 5, 2011 (UTC) Obviously, I've thought of this already. Thing is. if we do protect the Ben page, they'll just create articles named "Haunted Majora's Mask cartridge" or "You shouldn't have done that" or whatever trite thing they can come up with. Then we have to delete and protect those pages, and... you know. I've nothing against Zelda memes, snowclones, and creepypastas and the like being featured here though, as they are indelibly a part of what Zelda has become, and is indeed (perhaps not always positively, err, or at all positively) what lots of people connect with Zelda. I'm sure a lot more people know about Ben than, for instance, the Oracle games, and stuff. In my opinion, it should be included within our scope, if handled in the proper manner. --AuronKaizer ''' 23:53, March 5, 2011 (UTC) : If we decide to make page(s) for this, I still think we should have it (them) semi-protected since that sort of thing would be a primary target for vandalism. Jedimasterlink (talk) 00:19, March 6, 2011 (UTC) :Hmmm... as a very devoted follower of the Jadusable/BEN story (trailer might come out tonight!) I think that even if we DO make these page/pages, it would be kind of unnecessary. I mean, there is already an entire wiki on the subject. But if we do, it could work, just like we have a page for the AS and fan movies. In fact, Haunted MM probably has more followers than some of those.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 00:25, March 6, 2011 (UTC) I agree, for what it is worth.-- C2' / 22:44, March 6, 2011 (UTC) :Also bumping this. I'm in agreement with what AK said; I think we should have semiprotected pages for the 'main' things here (i.e. Ben and the Haunted Majora's Mask Cartridge) as we do have pages for Fan Games and The Hero of Time or whatever the hell it's called. I personally do not know much about the 'series' but I'm sure many contributors here do, so if we can do this properly I'm all for it. If it's decided that we DON'T want to do this, I say we fully protect Ben and Haunted Majora's Mask Cartridge or whatever the 'title' is. -'Minish Link' 21:18, May 10, 2011 (UTC) Well, Ben is a redirect, so I think if we follow the redirect for Ben, we could possibly make a haunted cartridge redirect to Jadusable. As much as I hate to suggest that. --[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 21:48, May 10, 2011 (UTC) :I'm going ahead and making that redirect, as well as 'Haunted Majora's Mask' and 'You Shouldn't Have Done That' now; it make sense and if we DO end up covering this Ben stuff then we can change them from redirects to real pages. Make sense? -'Minish Link' 22:17, May 10, 2011 (UTC) ::Makes sense, though I think one page is more than enough. Though that one page may need some expansion if we're going to keep it. Jedimasterlink (talk) 23:57, May 10, 2011 (UTC) So since this is done, correct me if I'm wrong, I'll be striking it off the list. --[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 14:12, May 15, 2011 (UTC) :For the time being, this is indeed done. If we decide we want to expand on the Jadusable page or whatever then we can do that some other time. -'Minish Link' 14:50, May 15, 2011 (UTC) To be honest, that page is crap. If we can expand it then maybe, but we have more information on a fairly stupid abriged series (IMO) than we have on an expansive ARG. It looks almost insulting. If we can just add the information on arc 1, the videos, which is the only part truly related to zelda, that should be fine.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 20:50, May 16, 2011 (UTC) :I find this hilarious for you to come back from months of hiatus of your last mainspace edit 17:06, 2010 December 13 (diff | hist) Rod of Seasons ‎ (doesn't this make more sense?) to comment on how one of our pages is crap. Perhaps if you decided to edit here, and actually be a participating member of the community instead of a forum-er, then you'd know that the Judasable page was a quick fix to a month long solution. --[[User:Jäzzi|'Jäzzi']](Talk) 20:57, May 16, 2011 (UTC) ::That might be just a tad too harsh, but I'm definitely in agreement with this. Please don't go inactive for months and then come back and call the pages crap. As Jazzi said, if you were an active contributor maybe you'd know that; it's being worked on and this discussion is (for now) over. So yeah. -'Minish Link' 21:28, May 16, 2011 (UTC) ::You know what, I apologize. I know I haven't been active in editing at all, and I shouldn't have called it crap. I just don't know much about editing on wikia, so I fell that the majority of my edits would be meaningless "Rewordings" or "Fixing some random spelling mistake" and I don't catch those much anyway. I'm just more interested in helping decide on stuff the wiki as a whole wants to do, not editing, which I guess is what wikis are all about. I am interested in improving the page though. I'll start working on it soon, but tonight I have a lot of homework. Sorry if I offended anyone.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 21:41, May 16, 2011 (UTC) :::Your assessment of the page's current quality is completely accurate, even though you were too harsh about pointing it out. (I would argue editing frequency doesn't affect your ability to tell how good a page is, though apparently some of us think differently, so I won't argue the point.) Anyway, it's good to see you're back, and thank you for apologizing. Jedimasterlink (talk) 01:18, May 17, 2011 (UTC) :It's cool; it was just a reminder. Glad to see you'll be editing again. -'Minish Link''' 22:23, May 16, 2011 (UTC)